And for the politically disenfranchised and liberally disabled, Happy Holidays.
We don't often go off the radical end and jump in among the lunatic fringe in this blog, but - just for argument for year's end - consider these ideas:
Somewhere there is a planet in the universe that is beaming all its stupid people to earth to become politicians.
The increase in complexity of society is outpacing the ability of the human mind and body to adapt to it.
In another dimension, the term "Passenger Rail" may mean something completely different.
The mean value of the human condition may just be "at the threshold of hell."
May the supreme builder of the universe bless you and keep you.
We don't expect to post again until after the first of the New Year.
©2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Where Should Amtrak Shine?
Everywhere and in every Passenger Rail endeavor, of course!
But let's not wish for too much. Focus is everything and we all know Congress has none.
Where Amtrak should be shining, it isn't. This weekend brings that to the fore when we look at air traffic snarled because of snow in the northeast. Flights in to Chicago are delayed because flights out to the east have to be. This storm should not be delaying Amtrak.
But it is. Looking at the scheduled vs. estimated arrival times for Amtrak in Chicago it appears that the delays for Amtrak are worse than air traffic.
Because we like it, we would certainly rather wait for a train in Union Station, Chicago, than we would wait for a flight at either of Midway or O'Hare. But not everybody likes trains as much.
Amtrak should be shining in the areas where there is no excuse for it to be as shoddy as the shoddy-as-the-passenger-trains-of-old airlines are. Trouble is, not enough people remember the shoddy Passenger Rail 1960s, BA.
Please email us and tell us where you think Amtrak should and could be shining without even one dollar of extra subsidy. Then tell us where the focus of future subsidy should be. As you know, our position is that Amtrak should be as heavily subsidized as roads and air traffic. So don't argure against subsidy. Just tell us something constructive.
©2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
But let's not wish for too much. Focus is everything and we all know Congress has none.
Where Amtrak should be shining, it isn't. This weekend brings that to the fore when we look at air traffic snarled because of snow in the northeast. Flights in to Chicago are delayed because flights out to the east have to be. This storm should not be delaying Amtrak.
But it is. Looking at the scheduled vs. estimated arrival times for Amtrak in Chicago it appears that the delays for Amtrak are worse than air traffic.
Because we like it, we would certainly rather wait for a train in Union Station, Chicago, than we would wait for a flight at either of Midway or O'Hare. But not everybody likes trains as much.
Amtrak should be shining in the areas where there is no excuse for it to be as shoddy as the shoddy-as-the-passenger-trains-of-old airlines are. Trouble is, not enough people remember the shoddy Passenger Rail 1960s, BA.
Please email us and tell us where you think Amtrak should and could be shining without even one dollar of extra subsidy. Then tell us where the focus of future subsidy should be. As you know, our position is that Amtrak should be as heavily subsidized as roads and air traffic. So don't argure against subsidy. Just tell us something constructive.
©2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Life Imitates What, Exactly?
We have all heard that life imitates art and form follows function. Among the many aphorisms that we hear, these two seem to hold the record for applicability.
In Passenger Rail, as in railroad design on the whole, form has always followed function. As a matter of fact, function has demanded that form follow. From the early passenger coaches to the specialized cars of the streamline era, to the super-specialized cruise cars being built for special trains, function has dictated form. Getting over the railroad within all gauges - and I don't just mean the distance between the rails - has been the function of passenger rail. Getting as many passengers over the railroad with the train is part of it.
Early on, carbuilders knew that drawing on the stagecoach or landau design and simply putting it on flanged wheels was not enough. It took a long time before European designers of coaches and other passenger equipment saw that just stringing together the bodies of several coaches to make the car - with the resulting compartmentalization and entry / exit from the outside of the car - was not enough. American designers resorted to the box with benches, and then Pullman and competitors made the special-purpose craze take off.
Still, getting the car over the railroad within all gauges - rails, height, width, and manageable length as a function of curvature of the railroad - was the function.
Railroad life began to imitate art in the streamlined era. Art Deco came to the railroad but its form never quite followed the function. It was easy to sheath a passenger car in stainless steel or paint that hid the rivets of the heavyweight steel era. It was not as easy to sheath a steam locomotive with the same art. The form and the art were never truly convenient for the function until the diesel era, when function was able to imitiate art and start the whole process over for the locomotive-hauled train. Streamlining often got torn off the steam locos and left in the shop for sake of convenience. Most Amtrak heritage coaches and other hand-me-downs from the streamline era lost their skirts (covering under-floor equipment) and wheel fairings (covering the ugly trucks).
Today, railroad life imitates art when the side of a train is painted to resemble a cartoon short from the 1940s and the "door closing" warning sound on the train is right out of Loony Tunes. I'm not sure what we're imitating when we try to turn the serious business of passenger transportation into a cartoon, but . . . maybe a jackass.
And now here's the political point: For the next decade or so, we are going to need some pretty good industrial design to help revitalize the Passenger Rail system that we American's have left to the scrap heap for the past four decades. Highways are no longer an option unless they are part of mega-corridors. Airways are going to get more congested and more dangerous, and the restrictions on industrial design - form following function - are more egregious.
Form will have to follow function. We are still going to have to get over the railroad within the limitations of all gauges. But we are going to have to have some art to imitate. It can't be Art Deco - that has been done to death. It is going to have to be pretty good art. Will the next Raymond Lowy please step forward.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
In Passenger Rail, as in railroad design on the whole, form has always followed function. As a matter of fact, function has demanded that form follow. From the early passenger coaches to the specialized cars of the streamline era, to the super-specialized cruise cars being built for special trains, function has dictated form. Getting over the railroad within all gauges - and I don't just mean the distance between the rails - has been the function of passenger rail. Getting as many passengers over the railroad with the train is part of it.
Early on, carbuilders knew that drawing on the stagecoach or landau design and simply putting it on flanged wheels was not enough. It took a long time before European designers of coaches and other passenger equipment saw that just stringing together the bodies of several coaches to make the car - with the resulting compartmentalization and entry / exit from the outside of the car - was not enough. American designers resorted to the box with benches, and then Pullman and competitors made the special-purpose craze take off.
Still, getting the car over the railroad within all gauges - rails, height, width, and manageable length as a function of curvature of the railroad - was the function.
Railroad life began to imitate art in the streamlined era. Art Deco came to the railroad but its form never quite followed the function. It was easy to sheath a passenger car in stainless steel or paint that hid the rivets of the heavyweight steel era. It was not as easy to sheath a steam locomotive with the same art. The form and the art were never truly convenient for the function until the diesel era, when function was able to imitiate art and start the whole process over for the locomotive-hauled train. Streamlining often got torn off the steam locos and left in the shop for sake of convenience. Most Amtrak heritage coaches and other hand-me-downs from the streamline era lost their skirts (covering under-floor equipment) and wheel fairings (covering the ugly trucks).
Today, railroad life imitates art when the side of a train is painted to resemble a cartoon short from the 1940s and the "door closing" warning sound on the train is right out of Loony Tunes. I'm not sure what we're imitating when we try to turn the serious business of passenger transportation into a cartoon, but . . . maybe a jackass.
And now here's the political point: For the next decade or so, we are going to need some pretty good industrial design to help revitalize the Passenger Rail system that we American's have left to the scrap heap for the past four decades. Highways are no longer an option unless they are part of mega-corridors. Airways are going to get more congested and more dangerous, and the restrictions on industrial design - form following function - are more egregious.
Form will have to follow function. We are still going to have to get over the railroad within the limitations of all gauges. But we are going to have to have some art to imitate. It can't be Art Deco - that has been done to death. It is going to have to be pretty good art. Will the next Raymond Lowy please step forward.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Holiday Greetings
Looks like - once again - our legislators do not intend to give us any presents this Holiday Season. We would not call the end-of-year Amtrak budget a present.
Wouldn't it be nice if you could board a train for a holiday visit?
We don't know how many of the readers of this blog can do that now. We are guessing that most of our readers, being train enthusiasts of one kind or another, are living near a source of Passenger Rail transportation. We would also guess that many people who don't have a source of Passenger Rail transport are not at all enthusiastic about Passenger Rail and probably don't read this blog.
Wouldn't it be nice if you lived in, oh, say Kansas City, and could make a weekend rail trip to Miami with as many schedule choices as you would have by air? (We found 51 air schedules that would do this during a single random weekend in December 2007.) Could or would Passenger Rail ever be able to top this? It is a pity that it can't.
When we had a real Passenger Rail network, not Amtrak, one could board connecting trains (locals) in between the major cities and make connections that made sense.
More and more, none of Amtrak makes sense. Will our legislators ever learn?
Holiday Greetings.
©2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Wouldn't it be nice if you could board a train for a holiday visit?
We don't know how many of the readers of this blog can do that now. We are guessing that most of our readers, being train enthusiasts of one kind or another, are living near a source of Passenger Rail transportation. We would also guess that many people who don't have a source of Passenger Rail transport are not at all enthusiastic about Passenger Rail and probably don't read this blog.
Wouldn't it be nice if you lived in, oh, say Kansas City, and could make a weekend rail trip to Miami with as many schedule choices as you would have by air? (We found 51 air schedules that would do this during a single random weekend in December 2007.) Could or would Passenger Rail ever be able to top this? It is a pity that it can't.
When we had a real Passenger Rail network, not Amtrak, one could board connecting trains (locals) in between the major cities and make connections that made sense.
More and more, none of Amtrak makes sense. Will our legislators ever learn?
Holiday Greetings.
©2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Imagine
We often hear arguments against government subsidy for Passenger Rail. The recent effort to refund Amtrak is a good example. The opponents of funding Amtrak point to the fact that Amtrak has never made a dollar for the government. Imagine that.
With the exception of government owned toll roads, has a highway ever made a dollar for the government? We mean really. You can argue that any plus in the highway trust fund is the equivalent of making money for the government. But is is really? We say no, because it is really only a surplus of taxes and user fees, it is not a profit. If you were to try to run a profit and loss analysis on any single stretch of non-toll road, you would not get a profit.
On the other side of the coin, imagine no government subsidies for anything. Private enterprise owns everything. We are experimenting with this in some states and the jury is still out as to whether a profit can be made. It will only be a profit if it is a toll road business. Otherwise the private enterprise's profit is just coming from the tax dollar just as medicaid contractors make their money from taxes paid into the medicare fund.
What if there were no government payments? Roads would be owned by trucking companies, for sure. They are the only businesses vested enough to want to carry the overhead. The airlines would own the air traffic system. And would anything be a system? It would be much like what the railroads had before standardization.
Imagine driving where you came to the end of a roadway owned by one owner, and you had to wait in line to pay the fee to get onto the roadway of another. But would that second roadway be of the same quality as the first? No, because there would be competition between the businesses and you may also find that the traffic rules, speed limits and safety appliances were different. The private owner would use rules of the road that brought him the most profit.
But there are laws, you say? That would mean a subsidy, even only if the government spent the money to standardize the laws, it's a subsidy.
So don't tell Mister Trains that Passenger Rail should not be subsidized. It is just as vital to our economy and to our security as is any other mode of transport. (With the possible exception of donkey-back.) And it is well past time that we make the decision to do it right.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
With the exception of government owned toll roads, has a highway ever made a dollar for the government? We mean really. You can argue that any plus in the highway trust fund is the equivalent of making money for the government. But is is really? We say no, because it is really only a surplus of taxes and user fees, it is not a profit. If you were to try to run a profit and loss analysis on any single stretch of non-toll road, you would not get a profit.
On the other side of the coin, imagine no government subsidies for anything. Private enterprise owns everything. We are experimenting with this in some states and the jury is still out as to whether a profit can be made. It will only be a profit if it is a toll road business. Otherwise the private enterprise's profit is just coming from the tax dollar just as medicaid contractors make their money from taxes paid into the medicare fund.
What if there were no government payments? Roads would be owned by trucking companies, for sure. They are the only businesses vested enough to want to carry the overhead. The airlines would own the air traffic system. And would anything be a system? It would be much like what the railroads had before standardization.
Imagine driving where you came to the end of a roadway owned by one owner, and you had to wait in line to pay the fee to get onto the roadway of another. But would that second roadway be of the same quality as the first? No, because there would be competition between the businesses and you may also find that the traffic rules, speed limits and safety appliances were different. The private owner would use rules of the road that brought him the most profit.
But there are laws, you say? That would mean a subsidy, even only if the government spent the money to standardize the laws, it's a subsidy.
So don't tell Mister Trains that Passenger Rail should not be subsidized. It is just as vital to our economy and to our security as is any other mode of transport. (With the possible exception of donkey-back.) And it is well past time that we make the decision to do it right.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, November 04, 2007
Don't Do That
We just wanted to expand a little on the Don Phillips opinion piece in the current (December 2007) Trains. The gist is that it may no longer be as much fun to be a railfan.
It got us thinking: Who or what doesn't want railroading to be fun any more?
Don names some names, the TSA and law enforcement since 9-11 for two. But who is really responsible for telling us not to like trains?
Let's start with the axiom: Anything that is enjoyable can be enjoyed too much and is therefore potentially bad for you. It is behind just about every recent prohibition and/or restriction of behavior of the past ten years.
Applied to Passenger Rail, this works in insidious ways. If you enjoy riding trains too much, government will have to post too many subsidies in the next budget. If you enjoy the scenery too much, you may travel by rail to too many national parks and dispoil the landscape. If you stand on the platform and watch too many trains, you may get in an accident on the platform. If you photograph too many trains, one of your photographs may land in the hands of terrorists.
So it comes back down the the risk averse society again. Fun requires risk, and our government just doesn't want us to take the risk any more. And as this becomes the norm, you will find fewer people ready to take the risk.
Trains are no fun when you can't see, feel, hear and touch them. Passenger Rail can be more fun when it is more than a transportation tool. But you are not supposed to use tools improperly.
The sooner our leaders stop treating us like children, the sooner we can start to have fun with trains again.
* * *
Please read Don Phillips' articles, they are a wake-up call.
* * *
Christopher sent some interesting ideas in his recent comments. Common ground is that gigantic projects require lots and lots of money. It is money that we are squandering elsewhere. It is also a wake-up call. Even the builders of Penn Station feared before the project was over that nothing like as monumental a civic project would ever be affordable again. We certainly hope they were wrong!
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
It got us thinking: Who or what doesn't want railroading to be fun any more?
Don names some names, the TSA and law enforcement since 9-11 for two. But who is really responsible for telling us not to like trains?
Let's start with the axiom: Anything that is enjoyable can be enjoyed too much and is therefore potentially bad for you. It is behind just about every recent prohibition and/or restriction of behavior of the past ten years.
Applied to Passenger Rail, this works in insidious ways. If you enjoy riding trains too much, government will have to post too many subsidies in the next budget. If you enjoy the scenery too much, you may travel by rail to too many national parks and dispoil the landscape. If you stand on the platform and watch too many trains, you may get in an accident on the platform. If you photograph too many trains, one of your photographs may land in the hands of terrorists.
So it comes back down the the risk averse society again. Fun requires risk, and our government just doesn't want us to take the risk any more. And as this becomes the norm, you will find fewer people ready to take the risk.
Trains are no fun when you can't see, feel, hear and touch them. Passenger Rail can be more fun when it is more than a transportation tool. But you are not supposed to use tools improperly.
The sooner our leaders stop treating us like children, the sooner we can start to have fun with trains again.
* * *
Please read Don Phillips' articles, they are a wake-up call.
* * *
Christopher sent some interesting ideas in his recent comments. Common ground is that gigantic projects require lots and lots of money. It is money that we are squandering elsewhere. It is also a wake-up call. Even the builders of Penn Station feared before the project was over that nothing like as monumental a civic project would ever be affordable again. We certainly hope they were wrong!
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, October 28, 2007
May Not Get There From Here
At least not for a long, long time.
There's a right way and a wrong way to finance new commuter rail. We may be seeing the wrong way with New Mexico Rail Runner. . . . meep! meep!
The communities of the Middle Rio Grande, from Santa Fe (which technically is not ON the Rio Grande) to Belen, constitute the only major coagulation of population in New Mexico. Even then, the total population does not exceed the number of souls that had to be evacuated from Southern California because of the recent wildfires.
The communities of the Middle Rio Grande enjoy clear air and clear water because of their unique location and BECAUSE of the low population density. Albuquerque and Bernalillo County are currently struggling with polution problems just BECAUSE the population has been growing and sprawling.
With the sprawl comes the need for more roads and more lanes on the ones that exist. In this case, the latter are Interstates 40 and 25. (New Mexico doesn't have any three-digit Interstates.)
Along comes Presidential Candidate and Governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson. He literally invented the Rail Runner project from whole cloth after his first election as governor, and he used lots of local political capital to bludgeon local politicians to go along with it.
Hey, it wasn't a bad idea, but it's time probably hadn't come yet. (Former Governor Toney Anaya has been pushing for a bullet train for New Mexico since his administration - and that time hasn't come yet either.)
So the MRGCOG raided the highway funds with the approval of the governor and the legislature and we now have service from Albuquerque (the Q - as "green" Mayor Martin Chavez wants it) to Belen on the south and to Bernalillo on the north. The highway funds will no longer support the expansion of service to Santa Fe (a must) and the Feds probably won't be kicking in. To make matters worse, the wool-pulled-over-eyes politicians are suddenly finding out what Mister Trains has said all along: That it will cost alot of tax dollars to subsidize this service over the coming years. More so if it never gets to Santa Fe.
Worse still, the highway funds are so low that the state can't fund any highway expansion without more taxes. Adding fifteen to fifty cents a gallon to the price of gasoline in the state that already pays the highest per-gallon price in the lower 48 has been discussed.
While commuter rail is usually a "green" solution, this certainly is not what is happening. While we wrangle about higher gas taxes or higher any taxes, those stuck commuters will spend more time on the freeways with their engines running and waisting fuel and adding to the air quality problems. The sprawl of The Q (thanks Mayor Marty) will see to that.
Oh, woe. We guess we will just have to pony up at the pump and hope. Because if Rail Runner falls on its fat fanny, we won't see communter rail in New Mexico again for lots of years.
Mister Trains is getting to the point where you won't see Mister Trains in New Mexico for long if this keeps up.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
There's a right way and a wrong way to finance new commuter rail. We may be seeing the wrong way with New Mexico Rail Runner. . . . meep! meep!
The communities of the Middle Rio Grande, from Santa Fe (which technically is not ON the Rio Grande) to Belen, constitute the only major coagulation of population in New Mexico. Even then, the total population does not exceed the number of souls that had to be evacuated from Southern California because of the recent wildfires.
The communities of the Middle Rio Grande enjoy clear air and clear water because of their unique location and BECAUSE of the low population density. Albuquerque and Bernalillo County are currently struggling with polution problems just BECAUSE the population has been growing and sprawling.
With the sprawl comes the need for more roads and more lanes on the ones that exist. In this case, the latter are Interstates 40 and 25. (New Mexico doesn't have any three-digit Interstates.)
Along comes Presidential Candidate and Governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson. He literally invented the Rail Runner project from whole cloth after his first election as governor, and he used lots of local political capital to bludgeon local politicians to go along with it.
Hey, it wasn't a bad idea, but it's time probably hadn't come yet. (Former Governor Toney Anaya has been pushing for a bullet train for New Mexico since his administration - and that time hasn't come yet either.)
So the MRGCOG raided the highway funds with the approval of the governor and the legislature and we now have service from Albuquerque (the Q - as "green" Mayor Martin Chavez wants it) to Belen on the south and to Bernalillo on the north. The highway funds will no longer support the expansion of service to Santa Fe (a must) and the Feds probably won't be kicking in. To make matters worse, the wool-pulled-over-eyes politicians are suddenly finding out what Mister Trains has said all along: That it will cost alot of tax dollars to subsidize this service over the coming years. More so if it never gets to Santa Fe.
Worse still, the highway funds are so low that the state can't fund any highway expansion without more taxes. Adding fifteen to fifty cents a gallon to the price of gasoline in the state that already pays the highest per-gallon price in the lower 48 has been discussed.
While commuter rail is usually a "green" solution, this certainly is not what is happening. While we wrangle about higher gas taxes or higher any taxes, those stuck commuters will spend more time on the freeways with their engines running and waisting fuel and adding to the air quality problems. The sprawl of The Q (thanks Mayor Marty) will see to that.
Oh, woe. We guess we will just have to pony up at the pump and hope. Because if Rail Runner falls on its fat fanny, we won't see communter rail in New Mexico again for lots of years.
Mister Trains is getting to the point where you won't see Mister Trains in New Mexico for long if this keeps up.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Risk Averse Society Bad for Railroad Development
We have been reading Jill Jonnes' excellent history of the buiding of New York's Penn Station and its tunnels called Conquering Gotham. In its time, this project was compared to completing the first transcontinental railroad and to building of the great pyramid.
We have been trying to think of railroad projects of the past fifty or so years that could compare with it in sheer size, technical innovation, risk, and usefulness of the end result. Of course, if you go back to 1957, sixty percent of the time was one of decline for the railroads. Also of course, the railroads were disinclined to do anything comparable.
For size, the New York terminal project, begun principally (in planning) in 1902, also included the twin tunnels under the Hudson River (North River), the yards that were built where most of the Tenderloin once lay, the quad tunnels under the East River, the connection with the LIRR, and the Sunnyside Yard complex. For innovation, nobody had ever tunneled under glacial silt and a swift-flowing tidal riverbed, and the electrical motive power system for the traction-powered trains had to be built from scratch. For risk, not only did the PRR have to pay for all of this itself (with private investment), but it had to assume the risk of dangerous political upheaval from the then-entrenched Tammany Tiger of New York City politics. And for usefulness, the tunnels and much of the subterranean station are still in use by Amtrak and New York commuter rail systems. (The above-ground portion of the station was demolished before the historic preservation movement took hold - for the construction of a "modern" building.)
So we started trying to think of railroad projects for the future. Projects that could compare with Penn Station. None exist. Why?
It comes down to risk. As a people and as corporate stockholders, citizens of these United States are no longer willing to accept risk. We will not do great deeds because we cannot think great thoughts. We cannot think great thoughts because all great and grand designs for future enterprise are fraught with risk.
God forbid that a man die digging a tunnel today. The lawyers and the insurance companies will put the company for which that man worked out of business with their claims and lawsuits. Private capital wants and needs government support to take a risk. It wants and needs absolution for any sins before going in. Call before digging. Somebody else must pay if we are at fault.
And that costs money.
We have dragged the rest of the world up with us, and the United States has now gotten cold feet. We progress in ever more measured steps and become, like the Europe of old, more interested in furthering our political position with the world than in furthering the domestic progress of our citizens. And those at the back of the line being dragged, with the progress of the front of the line slowing noticeably, are more than happy to step all over us to get to the front. By any means possible. Even by taking RISKS!
How pathetic.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
We have been trying to think of railroad projects of the past fifty or so years that could compare with it in sheer size, technical innovation, risk, and usefulness of the end result. Of course, if you go back to 1957, sixty percent of the time was one of decline for the railroads. Also of course, the railroads were disinclined to do anything comparable.
For size, the New York terminal project, begun principally (in planning) in 1902, also included the twin tunnels under the Hudson River (North River), the yards that were built where most of the Tenderloin once lay, the quad tunnels under the East River, the connection with the LIRR, and the Sunnyside Yard complex. For innovation, nobody had ever tunneled under glacial silt and a swift-flowing tidal riverbed, and the electrical motive power system for the traction-powered trains had to be built from scratch. For risk, not only did the PRR have to pay for all of this itself (with private investment), but it had to assume the risk of dangerous political upheaval from the then-entrenched Tammany Tiger of New York City politics. And for usefulness, the tunnels and much of the subterranean station are still in use by Amtrak and New York commuter rail systems. (The above-ground portion of the station was demolished before the historic preservation movement took hold - for the construction of a "modern" building.)
So we started trying to think of railroad projects for the future. Projects that could compare with Penn Station. None exist. Why?
It comes down to risk. As a people and as corporate stockholders, citizens of these United States are no longer willing to accept risk. We will not do great deeds because we cannot think great thoughts. We cannot think great thoughts because all great and grand designs for future enterprise are fraught with risk.
God forbid that a man die digging a tunnel today. The lawyers and the insurance companies will put the company for which that man worked out of business with their claims and lawsuits. Private capital wants and needs government support to take a risk. It wants and needs absolution for any sins before going in. Call before digging. Somebody else must pay if we are at fault.
And that costs money.
We have dragged the rest of the world up with us, and the United States has now gotten cold feet. We progress in ever more measured steps and become, like the Europe of old, more interested in furthering our political position with the world than in furthering the domestic progress of our citizens. And those at the back of the line being dragged, with the progress of the front of the line slowing noticeably, are more than happy to step all over us to get to the front. By any means possible. Even by taking RISKS!
How pathetic.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Additions to the List
We have been absent for awhile attributable to vacation. (We don't get much vacation, and self-imposed deadlines readily fall against the prospect of real relaxation time.)
Vacation was, in part, a driving trip. Some of the trip was along the old Frisco route from St. Louis to Springfield, MO. (Interstate 44) Got us thinkin' about the possibility of Passenger Rail on this route. There is, at least, a spoken committment by MODOT to get this up and running.
Lots and lots of the route that is visible from the Interstate has many degrees of curvature and is built either on fill or in deep cuts. We do not know the profile, but it would be a fair guess that it is from moderately to extremely hilly.
Then we thought about the list we put on this blog awhile back about what a new generation of passenger rail should look like.
We didn't think of this one, but it has got to be useful.
This route through MO seems like a mighty nice scenic route, but we wonder if it is useful in that the track speeds for passenger service have certain got to be restrictive. This route is as best, perhaps, utilitarian. Every year the traffic on I-44 gets worse, and at one point (about 20 mile east of Lebanon) it is the only railroad (that ever was) for at least 50 miles in all directions. People in these areas might ride it no matter what the schedule. So it could be utilitarian, but not really useful.
Much of the US rail network was built to engineering standards that are long outmoded. And we are still using these lines except where freight traffic increases have justified heavy investments in building to twenty-first century standards. (Before you comment, we think that the NE Corridor is just barely making it into this century.)
We know that eventually MODOT or USDOT will pay for revamping the Springfield - St. Louis line. And it will then be a mighty nice scenic line with slightly better track speeds and scheduling. It won't be high-speed rail.
When - oh, my darling when - are we in this otherwise blessed country going to be blessed with the brains to realize that our transportation systems have gone to pot in a big way.
Revamp nothing! Let's get politics out of our national security by getting everybody to pay $40 a year (and we mean no exceptions - kids break those piggybanks and smoker's and drinkers you know this isn't big bucks compared to what you burn and guzzle) toward the war against Islamic Terror, and then let's start using some of those highway trust funds (and highway taxes paid by the biggest users of them) to build transportation systems that are faster, easier and more fun.
Flying ain't no fun, the bus ain't no fun, and we can truly say after this trip that driving ain't no fun.
Passenger Rail is the only existing people transport system that qualifies for all three criteria - fast, easy, fun! Let's do it. Politicians hear this, the public will love ya for it!
©2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Vacation was, in part, a driving trip. Some of the trip was along the old Frisco route from St. Louis to Springfield, MO. (Interstate 44) Got us thinkin' about the possibility of Passenger Rail on this route. There is, at least, a spoken committment by MODOT to get this up and running.
Lots and lots of the route that is visible from the Interstate has many degrees of curvature and is built either on fill or in deep cuts. We do not know the profile, but it would be a fair guess that it is from moderately to extremely hilly.
Then we thought about the list we put on this blog awhile back about what a new generation of passenger rail should look like.
We didn't think of this one, but it has got to be useful.
This route through MO seems like a mighty nice scenic route, but we wonder if it is useful in that the track speeds for passenger service have certain got to be restrictive. This route is as best, perhaps, utilitarian. Every year the traffic on I-44 gets worse, and at one point (about 20 mile east of Lebanon) it is the only railroad (that ever was) for at least 50 miles in all directions. People in these areas might ride it no matter what the schedule. So it could be utilitarian, but not really useful.
Much of the US rail network was built to engineering standards that are long outmoded. And we are still using these lines except where freight traffic increases have justified heavy investments in building to twenty-first century standards. (Before you comment, we think that the NE Corridor is just barely making it into this century.)
We know that eventually MODOT or USDOT will pay for revamping the Springfield - St. Louis line. And it will then be a mighty nice scenic line with slightly better track speeds and scheduling. It won't be high-speed rail.
When - oh, my darling when - are we in this otherwise blessed country going to be blessed with the brains to realize that our transportation systems have gone to pot in a big way.
Revamp nothing! Let's get politics out of our national security by getting everybody to pay $40 a year (and we mean no exceptions - kids break those piggybanks and smoker's and drinkers you know this isn't big bucks compared to what you burn and guzzle) toward the war against Islamic Terror, and then let's start using some of those highway trust funds (and highway taxes paid by the biggest users of them) to build transportation systems that are faster, easier and more fun.
Flying ain't no fun, the bus ain't no fun, and we can truly say after this trip that driving ain't no fun.
Passenger Rail is the only existing people transport system that qualifies for all three criteria - fast, easy, fun! Let's do it. Politicians hear this, the public will love ya for it!
©2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Fall Vacation
Fall puts a positive spin on train watching and on train riding. In the Northeast and Upper Midwest, the fall colors will be peaking and the view from a passenger train can be nothing short of spectacular.
We urge those who haven't ridden recently to get out and ride a train this fall. Whether it is on Amtrak, a commuter railroad, or a tourist line, your enjoyment of the ride will be significantly enhanced by the fall foliage.
In the South, Southwest and Northwest it will take a little longer for the colors to max out, but the idea is the same. Ride a train and enjoy the foliage.
You can't do it while driving a car and you may not even be able to do it as much as an automobile passenger. With the highways clogged with big trucks and the nation in the full throes of a transportation crisis that the government doesn't care exists, the opportunity to snap a picture of that beautiful scene just may be blocked by the 52-foot trailer on the truck stuck in traffic next to you.
Passenger Rail still goes many places not on the highway and not easy to get to by road.
Many happy rail miles.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
We urge those who haven't ridden recently to get out and ride a train this fall. Whether it is on Amtrak, a commuter railroad, or a tourist line, your enjoyment of the ride will be significantly enhanced by the fall foliage.
In the South, Southwest and Northwest it will take a little longer for the colors to max out, but the idea is the same. Ride a train and enjoy the foliage.
You can't do it while driving a car and you may not even be able to do it as much as an automobile passenger. With the highways clogged with big trucks and the nation in the full throes of a transportation crisis that the government doesn't care exists, the opportunity to snap a picture of that beautiful scene just may be blocked by the 52-foot trailer on the truck stuck in traffic next to you.
Passenger Rail still goes many places not on the highway and not easy to get to by road.
Many happy rail miles.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, September 02, 2007
State Transportation Plans on Ropes from Rail Runner
I'm dropping the "editorial we" for this episode.
Big surprise of the year. As reported by the Albuquerque Journal, the State of NM may not have the funds necessary to maintain its highways. One of the reasons, the costs borne so far of, and the future cost of getting Rail Runner Express into Santa Fe, NM.
The point of this blog is not to say I told you so . . . even though I did. It is to ask why?
I am not an expert in rail planning. What I am is a die-hard railfan and an amateur rail historian with far more rail books read than written. Although I have made a living on transportation-related functions, I am not a professional transportation expert. And even I knew that Rail Runner was a bank-breaker. (I told the Journal, which is breaking the news as though it is actually news.)
It will continue to be a bank-breaker for years to come.
Herein lies what is wrong with most of, if not all of government today. Government leads the people where it wants us to go, not where the people want government to go. In the case of Rail Runner, the NMDOT is just starting to begin to admit that somewhere down the road they will want to ADDITIONALLY tax us for the privelege of having the rail system that was unilaterally decided on by King William I. (Governor and Presidentialist Bill Richardson)
And this from a state that has almost as much natural resource revenue as Alaska.
Don't get me wrong. I like trains, and I like Rail Runner. It is a fun ride, it is useful to some extent, and it works. It is just not cheap.
Passenger Rail is not cheap.
Our politicians (representatives - this is still a representative democracy, isn't it?) just shouldn't keep lying to us about it. If we want the kind of Passenger Rail service we deserve, we will have to subsidize it.
In the case of Rail Runner, it would be cheaper if the politicians weren't regularly in bed with and beholden to the 1) operators, 2) construction firms, 3) equipment manufacturers, 4)railroad that sold us the right-of-way, 5) ad infinitem. (Names omitted by design.)
Do you know the way to Santa Fe? If not, follow the money.
©2007 C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Big surprise of the year. As reported by the Albuquerque Journal, the State of NM may not have the funds necessary to maintain its highways. One of the reasons, the costs borne so far of, and the future cost of getting Rail Runner Express into Santa Fe, NM.
The point of this blog is not to say I told you so . . . even though I did. It is to ask why?
I am not an expert in rail planning. What I am is a die-hard railfan and an amateur rail historian with far more rail books read than written. Although I have made a living on transportation-related functions, I am not a professional transportation expert. And even I knew that Rail Runner was a bank-breaker. (I told the Journal, which is breaking the news as though it is actually news.)
It will continue to be a bank-breaker for years to come.
Herein lies what is wrong with most of, if not all of government today. Government leads the people where it wants us to go, not where the people want government to go. In the case of Rail Runner, the NMDOT is just starting to begin to admit that somewhere down the road they will want to ADDITIONALLY tax us for the privelege of having the rail system that was unilaterally decided on by King William I. (Governor and Presidentialist Bill Richardson)
And this from a state that has almost as much natural resource revenue as Alaska.
Don't get me wrong. I like trains, and I like Rail Runner. It is a fun ride, it is useful to some extent, and it works. It is just not cheap.
Passenger Rail is not cheap.
Our politicians (representatives - this is still a representative democracy, isn't it?) just shouldn't keep lying to us about it. If we want the kind of Passenger Rail service we deserve, we will have to subsidize it.
In the case of Rail Runner, it would be cheaper if the politicians weren't regularly in bed with and beholden to the 1) operators, 2) construction firms, 3) equipment manufacturers, 4)railroad that sold us the right-of-way, 5) ad infinitem. (Names omitted by design.)
Do you know the way to Santa Fe? If not, follow the money.
©2007 C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Dumb on Domes
Dome cars are a North American phenomenon that had their heyday during the 1950s and continuing into the early-to-middle Amtrak era. None have been built recently, although many have been reconditioned. VIA recognized the attraction of the dome car when they re-outfitted the Canadian.
We find it laughable when Amtrak attempts to tout the beautiful views through the glass of the Superliner lounges. We don't think we would get much valid argument that the 360 degree panoramic views from a dome or superdome blow the views from a Superliner lounge right off the track. From a dome, you can watch where a train is going, where it has been, and the spectacle of the hardware working to get the train over the road. And there was something about being closer to the glass that also made the experience more spectacular.
Amtrak made a big mistake with the Superliner concept. It was the most current trend in passenger equipment at the beginning of Amtrak, but there are better ideas that came before. And some that have come after.
When the next round of passenger car construction comes around, we would like to see the dome revisited. Not a revamp, but the same concept (same views and spectacle) in a new setting with new equipment and perhaps some innovations we haven't thought about as yet.
Unfortunately, with Amtrak being the political animal that it is, we are more likely to see high-capacity seating, the reduction of amenities, and the institution of higher fares for less than spectacular accomodations. By then, Congress will be looking for a way to take some pressure off the highways and the airways, and high-capacity, rather than high-comfort and enjoyable transportation - even for long-distance routes - may be in our future.
We hope not.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
We find it laughable when Amtrak attempts to tout the beautiful views through the glass of the Superliner lounges. We don't think we would get much valid argument that the 360 degree panoramic views from a dome or superdome blow the views from a Superliner lounge right off the track. From a dome, you can watch where a train is going, where it has been, and the spectacle of the hardware working to get the train over the road. And there was something about being closer to the glass that also made the experience more spectacular.
Amtrak made a big mistake with the Superliner concept. It was the most current trend in passenger equipment at the beginning of Amtrak, but there are better ideas that came before. And some that have come after.
When the next round of passenger car construction comes around, we would like to see the dome revisited. Not a revamp, but the same concept (same views and spectacle) in a new setting with new equipment and perhaps some innovations we haven't thought about as yet.
Unfortunately, with Amtrak being the political animal that it is, we are more likely to see high-capacity seating, the reduction of amenities, and the institution of higher fares for less than spectacular accomodations. By then, Congress will be looking for a way to take some pressure off the highways and the airways, and high-capacity, rather than high-comfort and enjoyable transportation - even for long-distance routes - may be in our future.
We hope not.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Technology Marches Forward
Just after posting to this blog on July 22, our old (6 years) computer came down and was replaced by a new one. The new one is far better that the old, though it cost about the same in today's dollars as did the old one in yesterday's dollars. We guess, to an economist, that means that it cost us less in real money. We got more for less than we did 6 years ago. Anyway, it has taken this long to get everything set up, but . . .
We started thinking about the technology that Passenger Rail is using today compared to 6 years ago. It compares because it hasn't changed that much.
In our opinion, this is because Passenger Rail has benefited less from technological blowback than has any other mode of people transport. And where it has benefited, the benefit is not out there where the passengers can see it.
Air transport is starting to fall into this category, too. But there are still investments being made in "cabin comforts" that include high-tech, when passengers are willing to pay for them.
A lot of rail passengers like to ride trains and will pay a lot to do so. But a large part of the train-riding public considers high-tech on the train the same way it would consider a GPS system in an Amish buggy. This is partly because much of our "rail cruise" Amtrak mentality is targeted at the senior citizen with the cash to pay the fare, and it is also partly because our Passenger Rail system continues to operate with (effectively) antique equipment. The only passenger delivery system that seems older right now is NASA's Space Shuttle fleet.
The other problem with high-tech on the rails, at least in America, is that the cost and lead-time for installation of such technology has to be borne, for the most part, by either the freight railroads (where the money is) or the taxpayer (where it more frequently isn't).
And cost it does. Because unlike the personal computer on our desk, the cost of hardware and lead-time to install (not to mention the disruption in business) is increasing. Commercially and governmentally, we are getting less bang (not more) for the buck.
We don't know the answer. But we do know that we would have a lot more people riding the trains if the oldest thing out there was (like our computer) six-years old or less.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
We started thinking about the technology that Passenger Rail is using today compared to 6 years ago. It compares because it hasn't changed that much.
In our opinion, this is because Passenger Rail has benefited less from technological blowback than has any other mode of people transport. And where it has benefited, the benefit is not out there where the passengers can see it.
Air transport is starting to fall into this category, too. But there are still investments being made in "cabin comforts" that include high-tech, when passengers are willing to pay for them.
A lot of rail passengers like to ride trains and will pay a lot to do so. But a large part of the train-riding public considers high-tech on the train the same way it would consider a GPS system in an Amish buggy. This is partly because much of our "rail cruise" Amtrak mentality is targeted at the senior citizen with the cash to pay the fare, and it is also partly because our Passenger Rail system continues to operate with (effectively) antique equipment. The only passenger delivery system that seems older right now is NASA's Space Shuttle fleet.
The other problem with high-tech on the rails, at least in America, is that the cost and lead-time for installation of such technology has to be borne, for the most part, by either the freight railroads (where the money is) or the taxpayer (where it more frequently isn't).
And cost it does. Because unlike the personal computer on our desk, the cost of hardware and lead-time to install (not to mention the disruption in business) is increasing. Commercially and governmentally, we are getting less bang (not more) for the buck.
We don't know the answer. But we do know that we would have a lot more people riding the trains if the oldest thing out there was (like our computer) six-years old or less.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Down at the Depot
And we don't mean Home Depot.
Some ruminations on the role of the depot in past and future Passenger Rail operations.
It bears repeating that Amtrak has given short schrift to the depot. With the exception of owned depots, Amtrak has chosen to put little to no money into the places where its passengers have to wait for its trains. Depots that have survived or been revived have generally been given their new lives at taxpayer expense and because of commuter rail.
The Passenger Rail depot can still be a major focal point for a community. Yes, the train is at the forefront, and getting a train - any train - can be more important to a community than where the train will stop. That's why many communities have been willing to accept the Amtrak Barn as their rail depots.
However, as Passenger Rail re-emerges as a preeminent form of transport in the Unites States, there will be pressures and incentives for communities to think more about their depots. Some will and some won't. We think those that do will be rewarded.
As during most of the Twentieth Century, current and future depots can be made a hub of community. The obvious use as a transportation hub, where as many modes as possible come together, may be as "old hat" as the concept of Passenger Rail carrying LCL and mail.
If communities now seeking Passenger Rail, whether of the intercity kind or of the commuter kind, start thinking ahead now, we may see multi-use depots the same way we see multi-use shopping centers. Only depots in larger urban centers historically saw anything like this, and only by accident.
But why can't future designers and developers put all the functions of modern life into the depot? Wouldn't it be fun to have a condo at the depot? What about medical care, hospitals, grocery stores, movie theaters, communications hubs? What about depots with arenas or stadiums? Throw in a casino or two if you are in Nevada or if the depot is on Native American land. What about the depot that is a destination all by itself?
One thing is certain: When the rail revival comes to full fruit, and come it will, there will be no limit to what the depot can be. Hell, we may even start shipping LCL freight from there, too.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Some ruminations on the role of the depot in past and future Passenger Rail operations.
It bears repeating that Amtrak has given short schrift to the depot. With the exception of owned depots, Amtrak has chosen to put little to no money into the places where its passengers have to wait for its trains. Depots that have survived or been revived have generally been given their new lives at taxpayer expense and because of commuter rail.
The Passenger Rail depot can still be a major focal point for a community. Yes, the train is at the forefront, and getting a train - any train - can be more important to a community than where the train will stop. That's why many communities have been willing to accept the Amtrak Barn as their rail depots.
However, as Passenger Rail re-emerges as a preeminent form of transport in the Unites States, there will be pressures and incentives for communities to think more about their depots. Some will and some won't. We think those that do will be rewarded.
As during most of the Twentieth Century, current and future depots can be made a hub of community. The obvious use as a transportation hub, where as many modes as possible come together, may be as "old hat" as the concept of Passenger Rail carrying LCL and mail.
If communities now seeking Passenger Rail, whether of the intercity kind or of the commuter kind, start thinking ahead now, we may see multi-use depots the same way we see multi-use shopping centers. Only depots in larger urban centers historically saw anything like this, and only by accident.
But why can't future designers and developers put all the functions of modern life into the depot? Wouldn't it be fun to have a condo at the depot? What about medical care, hospitals, grocery stores, movie theaters, communications hubs? What about depots with arenas or stadiums? Throw in a casino or two if you are in Nevada or if the depot is on Native American land. What about the depot that is a destination all by itself?
One thing is certain: When the rail revival comes to full fruit, and come it will, there will be no limit to what the depot can be. Hell, we may even start shipping LCL freight from there, too.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Span of Attention
Anniversary Post. Mistertrains and Missustrains celebrate their 37th.
We come to the trough and expect to find water in it. If Congress is the trough, then the water has become a bunch of old geezers playing god with our government. Those that aren't geezers are running for president.
Nowhere was this more apparent than during the all night debate over Iraq troop withdrawal.
A comment-poster wanted a plan. We plan to do everything we can to see that not one - and I must repeat NOT ONE - incumbent gets re-elected this cycle. Too much is at stake for Passenger Rail and for other critical issues in this country. We are getting tired of the same old crap. Hope everybody is with us.
Thanks to all for reading this blog and for your creative, thoughtful, and positively inspiring comments. Keep it up.
© C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
We come to the trough and expect to find water in it. If Congress is the trough, then the water has become a bunch of old geezers playing god with our government. Those that aren't geezers are running for president.
Nowhere was this more apparent than during the all night debate over Iraq troop withdrawal.
A comment-poster wanted a plan. We plan to do everything we can to see that not one - and I must repeat NOT ONE - incumbent gets re-elected this cycle. Too much is at stake for Passenger Rail and for other critical issues in this country. We are getting tired of the same old crap. Hope everybody is with us.
Thanks to all for reading this blog and for your creative, thoughtful, and positively inspiring comments. Keep it up.
© C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, July 15, 2007
What Does It Take?
What does it take to make things right?
Somehow we got it right with Conrail. Conrail took over the bankrupt Northeastern freight railroads, including the stillborn Penn Centrail (which was something like trying to put two Siamese twins back together). Bless them, Amtrak took the passenger routes so Conrail didn't have that problem.
Conrail took a massive infusion of federal cash and eventually got a good result. Conrail pared down the route structure, kept what remained profitable, and eventually sold out to private enterprise - the best possible result.
Amtrak took an arguably large infusion of cash at the outset and has been taking federal cash both intravenously and by mouth in large doses ever since. Instead of paring, Amtrak cut to the bone. Instead of keeping what remained profitable, Amtrak was stuck with no profit at all - from day one.
We argue that another massive infusion of cash is the only hope, but it must come with conditions. No, those conditions should not be that Amtrak make a profit. It should be that Amtrak regroup. Think outside the box, keep what makes sense, establish a completely new route and schedule structure, and become what it is supposed to be: A National Passenger Rail Network.
It's too late to just take what still exists and work with it. With the possible exception of the Northeast Corridor (which actually should be a separate railroad), everything needs to be new, different, innovative, smart, inviting, efficient, and Twenty-First Century. Stations should not look like skid-row housing and passenger cars shouldn't look anything like the streamliners of the 1950s. Give us something new, and we think taxpayers will welcome it, pay for it, and use it. Leave the antique cars to the tourist railroads and to the rail cruise companies. (Let's face it, all current Amtrak cars are antiques.)
This won't and can't happen over night. The lead times on something like this are years, not months. So all of the funding doesn't have to come at once. But come it has to. Congress, please listen.
Given the dismal prospect of today's Amtrak (ugh!), air travel (groan!), bus (eyuuuch!), or driving (oh, crap!), most of us will say something new needs to come of this.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Somehow we got it right with Conrail. Conrail took over the bankrupt Northeastern freight railroads, including the stillborn Penn Centrail (which was something like trying to put two Siamese twins back together). Bless them, Amtrak took the passenger routes so Conrail didn't have that problem.
Conrail took a massive infusion of federal cash and eventually got a good result. Conrail pared down the route structure, kept what remained profitable, and eventually sold out to private enterprise - the best possible result.
Amtrak took an arguably large infusion of cash at the outset and has been taking federal cash both intravenously and by mouth in large doses ever since. Instead of paring, Amtrak cut to the bone. Instead of keeping what remained profitable, Amtrak was stuck with no profit at all - from day one.
We argue that another massive infusion of cash is the only hope, but it must come with conditions. No, those conditions should not be that Amtrak make a profit. It should be that Amtrak regroup. Think outside the box, keep what makes sense, establish a completely new route and schedule structure, and become what it is supposed to be: A National Passenger Rail Network.
It's too late to just take what still exists and work with it. With the possible exception of the Northeast Corridor (which actually should be a separate railroad), everything needs to be new, different, innovative, smart, inviting, efficient, and Twenty-First Century. Stations should not look like skid-row housing and passenger cars shouldn't look anything like the streamliners of the 1950s. Give us something new, and we think taxpayers will welcome it, pay for it, and use it. Leave the antique cars to the tourist railroads and to the rail cruise companies. (Let's face it, all current Amtrak cars are antiques.)
This won't and can't happen over night. The lead times on something like this are years, not months. So all of the funding doesn't have to come at once. But come it has to. Congress, please listen.
Given the dismal prospect of today's Amtrak (ugh!), air travel (groan!), bus (eyuuuch!), or driving (oh, crap!), most of us will say something new needs to come of this.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, July 08, 2007
What's Wrong
The title is not a question. We are again writing about New Mexico Rail Runner.
First three things:
Train Frequency: Not enough daytime trains. Judging from what we saw and heard on board, hourly departures from Albuquerque would not be out of line. This railroad does have places where trains can pass, and the management should put in more passing sidings if needed. No commuter rail service is going to build a following with less than hourly service during daytime hours.
(The big guys fudge on this and usually include one hourly lapse during the day. Usually around 2pm or just before the traffic buildup for rush hours. Sometimes this is only to clear freight service, but mostly it is to make a shift change for employees who have been on service since about 4am. Neither would be true for Rail Runner.)
Scheduling: This ties in with frequency. Fifteen minutes is nice and leisurely at each end, but the only place this should happen is at the train's origination point. Make an immediate departure and tighten up to an hourly schedule.
Connections: We noted that the only place a connection was prepared to take train passengers on to other destinations was in Bernalillo, where a shuttle was prepared to go to the Santa Ana Star Casino. In Albuquerque, the free circulator run by ABQ Ride was leaving before anyone could walk to the boarding point from the train. In Belen, there just aren't any connections. Because the stations are only close to something (work, restaurants, businesses, recreational locations) in Albuquerque's downtown, we think many will not consider the train until there are better connections that take riders more places from the station. The converse of this is that feeders from popular locations and neighborhoods will bring revenue riders to the train.
What else is wrong? We still don't know where this is going to go when the heavy-duty subsidies run out. Governor Richardson was a big supporter, but he won't be governor forever. We hope. And the justice department people (both state and federal) are asking alot of questions of many of the architects and project managers that have previously been on the scene to move and shake building projects. Extension of Rail Runner to Santa Fe isn't railroading as much as a state sponsored building project. If too many connected people go down in flames, will it ever get done?
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
First three things:
Train Frequency: Not enough daytime trains. Judging from what we saw and heard on board, hourly departures from Albuquerque would not be out of line. This railroad does have places where trains can pass, and the management should put in more passing sidings if needed. No commuter rail service is going to build a following with less than hourly service during daytime hours.
(The big guys fudge on this and usually include one hourly lapse during the day. Usually around 2pm or just before the traffic buildup for rush hours. Sometimes this is only to clear freight service, but mostly it is to make a shift change for employees who have been on service since about 4am. Neither would be true for Rail Runner.)
Scheduling: This ties in with frequency. Fifteen minutes is nice and leisurely at each end, but the only place this should happen is at the train's origination point. Make an immediate departure and tighten up to an hourly schedule.
Connections: We noted that the only place a connection was prepared to take train passengers on to other destinations was in Bernalillo, where a shuttle was prepared to go to the Santa Ana Star Casino. In Albuquerque, the free circulator run by ABQ Ride was leaving before anyone could walk to the boarding point from the train. In Belen, there just aren't any connections. Because the stations are only close to something (work, restaurants, businesses, recreational locations) in Albuquerque's downtown, we think many will not consider the train until there are better connections that take riders more places from the station. The converse of this is that feeders from popular locations and neighborhoods will bring revenue riders to the train.
What else is wrong? We still don't know where this is going to go when the heavy-duty subsidies run out. Governor Richardson was a big supporter, but he won't be governor forever. We hope. And the justice department people (both state and federal) are asking alot of questions of many of the architects and project managers that have previously been on the scene to move and shake building projects. Extension of Rail Runner to Santa Fe isn't railroading as much as a state sponsored building project. If too many connected people go down in flames, will it ever get done?
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, July 01, 2007
Some Things Get Done Right
Mister Trains has finally taken a round trip on New Mexico Rail Runner.
For this new commuter operation to which we have given a lot of bad lip service, quite a few things have been done right.
The trains are clean, neat, and new. We know they will wear as ridership increases, and we hope it does.
Train personnel are friendly and courteous. The fare structure is fair. We rode on a hot day, and the air conditioning and lighting was operating smoothly on the train voltage from the well-maintained motive power.
The train was on time at every station. For those stops of duration, the departures were on time as well. This may be the most important achievement.
Seating is in sets of four facing seats. Every other set has a table in between. This makes for a convenient club car atmosphere when trains are not full, but may be inconvenient for commuter crowds.
We couldn't see the destination signs in stations very well from the upper deck. The Toronto-style double-decks have three levels with ample space for bicycles and wheelchairs or other assists. There is no accomodation for handicap access to the upper levels.
We haven't ridden any other commuter operation that has such beautiful scenery (mostly south of Albuquerque) and such ugly, messy industrial areas (both north and south). The ugliness of post-industrial Albuquerque may be a turn-off for potential future riders.
Next time, what is not right.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
For this new commuter operation to which we have given a lot of bad lip service, quite a few things have been done right.
The trains are clean, neat, and new. We know they will wear as ridership increases, and we hope it does.
Train personnel are friendly and courteous. The fare structure is fair. We rode on a hot day, and the air conditioning and lighting was operating smoothly on the train voltage from the well-maintained motive power.
The train was on time at every station. For those stops of duration, the departures were on time as well. This may be the most important achievement.
Seating is in sets of four facing seats. Every other set has a table in between. This makes for a convenient club car atmosphere when trains are not full, but may be inconvenient for commuter crowds.
We couldn't see the destination signs in stations very well from the upper deck. The Toronto-style double-decks have three levels with ample space for bicycles and wheelchairs or other assists. There is no accomodation for handicap access to the upper levels.
We haven't ridden any other commuter operation that has such beautiful scenery (mostly south of Albuquerque) and such ugly, messy industrial areas (both north and south). The ugliness of post-industrial Albuquerque may be a turn-off for potential future riders.
Next time, what is not right.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, June 17, 2007
National Association of Railroad Passengers
We have not supported this fine organization in the past. Oversight, possibly.
In the seventh decade of life in these very good United States, we find that there are way too many organizations that need our assistance for their advocacy before Congress and before other legislative bodies, committees and organizations. And there are far too few funds to pony up for all.
We have to pick and choose.
We recently received a membership package from NARP, and we urge anyone with the will and the funds to consider joining and contributing to this fine organization. That Amtrak is better today than it would be without NARP is not in doubt. Whether any advocacy group can save Amtrak is, as also is whether Amtrak should be saved in anything like its current form.
So Mister Trains will consider all of the possibilities with deliberation. Our cash will only go so far.
Meanwhile, we are soon going to take a ride on New Mexico Rail Runner, now in its first ripening and awaiting extension to Santa Fe, NM. That we haven't done so is another function of lack of both time and cash. We will report on our ride another time.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
In the seventh decade of life in these very good United States, we find that there are way too many organizations that need our assistance for their advocacy before Congress and before other legislative bodies, committees and organizations. And there are far too few funds to pony up for all.
We have to pick and choose.
We recently received a membership package from NARP, and we urge anyone with the will and the funds to consider joining and contributing to this fine organization. That Amtrak is better today than it would be without NARP is not in doubt. Whether any advocacy group can save Amtrak is, as also is whether Amtrak should be saved in anything like its current form.
So Mister Trains will consider all of the possibilities with deliberation. Our cash will only go so far.
Meanwhile, we are soon going to take a ride on New Mexico Rail Runner, now in its first ripening and awaiting extension to Santa Fe, NM. That we haven't done so is another function of lack of both time and cash. We will report on our ride another time.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Sunday, June 10, 2007
NIMBYs Strike . . . and Strike
There is perhaps nothing so infuriating to a United States citizen as to have the government tell him/her what to do with his/her property. So it comes as no surprise that people in Texas do not want Union Pacific to get the benefit of eminent domain to relocate tracks out of the congested hearts of Texas cities.
Union Pacific, of course, has never been noted for either its tact or its hearfelt good will to the public in general and to property owners in particular. Witness UP's years long battle with some toy and model manufacturers over the use and licensing of the UP logos. And yes, folks, if you take a picture of a UP train and put it up on the wall of your den, you may get a call from a UP lawyer.
Of course UP was one of the original transcontinentals that spawned the term "robber barons." It is also the company that swallowed the Octopus, Southern Pacific.
Also, relocating tracks from unconvenient locations for freight rail does nothing to benefit Passenger Rail - unless the ROWs are railbanked or otherwise preserved for this use. Some of the best freight rail routes in the country would make some of the best commuter and Passenger Rail routes - if abandoned by the freight railroads.
And the position of this blogger has always been that Passenger Rail just won't work if it is not subsidized by government in some way.
That way should never be the taking of private property for the purpose of turning it over to another private enterprise. That's what UP would like to have done in Texas, and Texas government is considering it.
That brings us to this point. We have advocated the possible creative financing of Passenger Rail by re-investing private money. Is this a contradiction?
It is only if the private money gets to control real estate that was taken in eminent domain. So we have to be careful. What we would rather see, if these routes really need to be populated with trains instead of with private enterprises, is that the property owner gets his chance to invest in the enterprise and reap any rewards. The property owner's investment is putting in the land for the route. We'd like to see this work for new passenger tracks as well.
So move UP if we must, give them some land, but let them pay a big dividend on that land to the guy or gal who had to give it up. And let UP leave the old tracks so that we can put passengers in trains running on them.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Union Pacific, of course, has never been noted for either its tact or its hearfelt good will to the public in general and to property owners in particular. Witness UP's years long battle with some toy and model manufacturers over the use and licensing of the UP logos. And yes, folks, if you take a picture of a UP train and put it up on the wall of your den, you may get a call from a UP lawyer.
Of course UP was one of the original transcontinentals that spawned the term "robber barons." It is also the company that swallowed the Octopus, Southern Pacific.
Also, relocating tracks from unconvenient locations for freight rail does nothing to benefit Passenger Rail - unless the ROWs are railbanked or otherwise preserved for this use. Some of the best freight rail routes in the country would make some of the best commuter and Passenger Rail routes - if abandoned by the freight railroads.
And the position of this blogger has always been that Passenger Rail just won't work if it is not subsidized by government in some way.
That way should never be the taking of private property for the purpose of turning it over to another private enterprise. That's what UP would like to have done in Texas, and Texas government is considering it.
That brings us to this point. We have advocated the possible creative financing of Passenger Rail by re-investing private money. Is this a contradiction?
It is only if the private money gets to control real estate that was taken in eminent domain. So we have to be careful. What we would rather see, if these routes really need to be populated with trains instead of with private enterprises, is that the property owner gets his chance to invest in the enterprise and reap any rewards. The property owner's investment is putting in the land for the route. We'd like to see this work for new passenger tracks as well.
So move UP if we must, give them some land, but let them pay a big dividend on that land to the guy or gal who had to give it up. And let UP leave the old tracks so that we can put passengers in trains running on them.
© 2007 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)